Posted by Mark Silva at 10:05 am CST
On this question of a presidential pardon for Lewis “Scooter’’ Libby, President Bush says he will stay out of the matter until Libby’s legal appeal runs its course – and that may be well-advised, in light of how well presidential pardons have gone over in this country.
The Gallup Organization, reopening its archives, has found that “the public has generally opposed high-profile presidential pardons in the recent past.’’ In the long-run, they may prove less harmful, however. “The evidence is more mixed,’’ Gallup reports, “as to how the pardons affect the president's image in the years after they have been issued.’’
Americans opposed three big pardons, Gallup says: President Gerald Ford 's pardon of former president Richard Nixon, President George H. W. Bush's pardon of former Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger, and President Bill Clinton's pardon of fugitive financier Marc Rich.
Opposition to these pardons also “had an immediate impact on the public's overall assessment of Ford and Clinton,’’ Gallup’s Frank Newport and Joseph Carroll report. “Ford's job approval ratings fell sharply and Clinton's favorable ratings fell dramatically in the short term.’’
“The current president Bush, whose job approval rating is at 33% -- including a 9% rating among Democrats -- doesn't have a lot to lose in the court of public opinion,’’ they suggest, “but history suggests that the public's initial reaction to the pardon itself is highly likely to be negative.’’
From the archives:
On Sept. 8, 1974, about a month after Nixon resigned from office, Ford granted his predecessor an unconditional pardon for any crimes committed while he was president. A Sept. 6-9, 1974, Gallup Poll, which was in the field as the pardon was announced, found that only 38% of Americans said Ford should pardon Nixon, while 53% said he should not.
By 1982, however, Americans were asked to look back on the Nixon pardon, and were more evenly divided in their views. By 1986, more than half of Americans (54%) said it had been the right thing to do.
A majority of Americans also disapproved of the last President Bush's pardon of Weinberger, who was scheduled to stand trial in early 1993 for his role in the Reagan administration's Iran-Contra scandal. Bush issued the pardon on Dec. 24, 1992, after he had become a lame-duck president when Clinton defeated him in the November 1992 election.
Both immediately before and after the pardon, only about one in four Americans supported it. In November of that year, 59 percent said Bush should pardon Weinberger, and 27 percent said he shouldn’t. By the end of December, opposition ran at 54 percent, approval 27 percent.
The pardon, however, appeared to have no impact on Bush’s own approval ratings, which were low when he left office.
On Clinton’s last day in office, in January 2001, he issued several controversial pardons, including pardons for tax evasion and other crimes for Marc Rich and drug charges for his half-brother Roger Clinton.
According to a Feb. 1-4, 2001, Gallup Poll, only 34% of Americans approved when asked about the group of pardons Clinton issued on his last day in office, while 50% disapproved. Sixteen percent had no opinion.
Gallup found even fewer Americans, 20%, supporting Clinton's decision to pardon Rich specifically, according to a mid-February poll. By early March, public approval of the Rich pardon had decreased to just 11%.
“There is little question that Clinton's image was hurt by these controversial pardons in the short term,’’ the Gallupers report. “Before Clinton left office, a majority of Americans (57%) rated him favorably. That rating fell after the pardons, reaching a low of 39% in early March 2001.
Yet, by the end of 2001, his image had improved. And today, Clinton's favorable ratings in Gallup polls are as high as any since 1998.
“Despite the probability of a negative reaction to the pardon per se, it is questionable whether a pardon would have a negative impact on Bush's overall job approval or favorability ratings,’’ Newport and Carroll conclude. “This is primarily because Bush's standing in the public's eyes is so low already, and because views of Bush are highly polarized.’’
For more, see the Gallup report.
• 
• 
• 
• 
Comments
So when did Dubya EVER care what Americans think? He'll pardon Scooter and the heck to the rest of us.
Posted by: Janstress | March 9, 2007 11:55 AM
I hope W. pardons Scooter right away.
Scooter was COVICTED of lying by a group of his peer's.
Since he worked at the highest level of government, as a whitehouse official no less,and he betrayed the publics trust ,he should get 30 yrs minimum in the Federal lockup.
If W. pardon's Scooter right now everything that's left of the Republicans credibility, that's already built on a House of Cards, would crumble on a worldwide scale.
Posted by: John E. | March 9, 2007 12:08 PM
As the great NIU scholar put it -
"Scooter (Clinton) was COVICTED (IMPEACHED)of lying by a group of his peer's.
Since he worked at the highest level of government, as a whitehouse official no less,and he betrayed the publics trust ,he should get 30 yrs minimum in the Federal lockup."
Oh wait, Clinton's been out of office for 7 years, so none of this is relevant.
Posted by: Heman | March 9, 2007 12:43 PM
Clinton has been out of office for nearly 7 yrs so other than you John D, no one cares about the stain on Monica's dress anymore.
I also hear that Streamwood doesn't give out parking tickets so I'm sure that they'll all vote for Obama in 08.
Posted by: John E. | March 9, 2007 1:18 PM
Can someone explain to me why we have pardons in the first place? It was always baffling to me that the President has the power to overrule our Justice system. If a person is wrongly imprisoned, isn't there a process within the justice system to correct this wrong?
Someone please educate me on the purpose and intent of Presidential Pardons?
Posted by: dave | March 9, 2007 1:58 PM
Clinton has been out of office for nearly 7 yrs so other than you John D, no one cares about the stain on Monica's dress anymore.
I also hear that Streamwood doesn't give out parking tickets so I'm sure that they'll all vote for Obama in 08.
Posted by: John E. | Mar 9, 2007 1:18:52 PM
As I stated, you are master of the obvious. After 7 years, a crime is no longer important and should not be judged to any other.
By the way, I wish I could say I was John D, but I am not. Thanks for the honor of comparison though.
Posted by: Heman | March 9, 2007 2:58 PM
BILL CLINTON IS NOT THE PRESIDENT ANYMORE!!!
Wingnuts, that dog doesn't hunt for you anymore,get over it.
Posted by: Sheman | March 9, 2007 3:16 PM
BILL CLINTON IS NOT THE PRESIDENT ANYMORE!!!
Wingnuts, that dog doesn't hunt for you anymore,get over it.
Posted by: Sheman | Mar 9, 2007 3:16:27 PM
That is exactly what I am saying. After you leave a job, and a certain amount of time passes, a crime can no longer be compared to another. Geez you guys are show.
Posted by: Heman | March 9, 2007 3:40 PM
dave,
A pardon is "an act of grace which exempts the individual on whom it is bestowed from the punishment the law inflicts for a crime he has committed"
In other words by accepting a pardon you are accepting that a crime was committed, but you are relieved from punishment. It doesn't overrule the justice system because it does not expunge the crime from record.
Posted by: jethro | March 9, 2007 3:42 PM
jethro... thanks, but that's not exactly what I was asking. I guess I understand what a pardon IS, I just don't understand why the president needs the power to pardon.
In this country, we're all supposed to be equal under the law. If my cousin Billy can't give me an "act of grace" after I'm conviced of bank robbery and set me free, why does the President get the right to do it for his buddies or for the pals of those who lobby him appropriately?
Is there a good reason for presidential pardon's that's good for the overall health of the republic I'm missing here (not just good for Mr. President)?
Posted by: Dave | March 9, 2007 4:22 PM
Rot in jail scumbag. He lied under oath. End of story. GOP nutters get a life.
Posted by: Logic Prisoner | March 9, 2007 5:31 PM
Five years before consideration for a pardon. I'll give GW that much. Time will tell if he sticks by it. The record shows he will. He's given less pardons than any President in over a hundered years. I like Bubba but those pardons at the end of his last term where embarrassing.
Posted by: Logic Prisoner | March 9, 2007 5:34 PM
Is there a good reason for presidential pardon's that's good for the overall health of the republic I'm missing here (not just good for Mr. President)?
Posted by: Dave | Mar 9, 2007 4:22:17 PM
It was intended to be one of the checks and balances between the branches of government. It would allow the Executive Branch to override the Judicial Branch if there was a miscarraige of justice in a criminal proceeding.
Posted by: Tony | March 9, 2007 6:26 PM
Tony,
Thanks.. I guess that makes sense. Checks & balances needed in all directions. I've just for some reason come to think of them over time as something tossed back and forth between the executive & legislative. Guess I'm not smarter than a 5th grader.
Dave
Posted by: Dave | March 9, 2007 8:37 PM
By the way, I wish I could say I was John D, but I am not. Thanks for the honor of comparison though.
Posted by: Heman | Mar 9, 2007 2:58:22 PM
Well you just lost a ton of credibility.
Posted by: bill r. | March 10, 2007 7:10 AM
"By the way, I wish I could say I was John D, but I am not. Thanks for the honor of comparison though.
Posted by: Heman | Mar 9, 2007 2:58:22 PM"
The cult of personality?
Posted by: C.Morris | March 10, 2007 1:41 PM